Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Faithless elector: A court ruling just changed how we pick our president
MSN News ^ | August 21, 2019 | Pete Williams, NBC News

Posted on 08/21/2019 8:25:28 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

A federal appeals court ruled late Tuesday that presidential electors who cast the actual ballots for president and vice president are free to vote as they wish and cannot be required to follow the results of the popular vote in their states.

The decision could give a single elector the power to decide the outcome of a presidential election — if the popular vote results in an apparent Electoral College tie.

"This issue could be a ticking time bomb in our divided politics. It's not hard to imagine how a single faithless elector, voting differently than his or her state did, could swing a close presidential election," said Mark Murray, NBC News senior political editor.

It hasn't been much of an issue in American political history because when an elector refuses to follow the results of a state's popular vote, the state simply throws the ballot away. But Tuesday's ruling says states cannot do that.

(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: constitution; constructionism; constructionist; electoralcollege; faithlesselectors; nationalpopularvote; npv; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last
To: 2ndDivisionVet; Chode; Squantos; SkyDancer; Lockbox; carriage_hill; MtnClimber; tubebender; ...

The Presidential Election is on Tuesday, November 3, 2020.
About the Electors
What are the qualifications to be an Elector?
The U.S. Constitution contains very few provisions relating to the qualifications of Electors. Article II, section 1, clause 2 provides that no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector. As a historical matter, the 14th Amendment provides that state officials who have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States or given aid and comfort to its enemies are disqualified from serving as Electors. This prohibition relates to the post-Civil War era.

The National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) has compiled a brief summary of state laws about the various procedures, which vary from state to state, for selecting slates of potential electors and for conducting the meeting of the electors. The document, Summary: State Laws Regarding Presidential Electors, can be downloaded from the NASS website.

Each state’s Certificates of Ascertainment confirms the names of its appointed electors. A state’s certification of its electors is generally sufficient to establish the qualifications of electors.

Who selects the Electors?
Choosing each state’s Electors is a two-part process. First, the political parties in each state choose slates of potential Electors sometime before the general election. Second, on Election Day, the voters in each state select their state’s Electors by casting their ballots for President.

The first part of the process is controlled by the political parties in each state and varies from state to state. Generally, the parties either nominate slates of potential Electors at their state party conventions or they chose them by a vote of the party’s central committee. This happens in each state for each party by whatever rules the state party and (sometimes) the national party have for the process. This first part of the process results in each Presidential candidate having their own unique slate of potential Electors.

Political parties often choose Electors for the slate to recognize their service and dedication to that political party. They may be state elected officials, state party leaders, or people in the state who have a personal or political affiliation with their party’s Presidential candidate. (For specific information about how slates of potential Electors are chosen, contact the political parties in each state.)

The second part of the process happens on Election Day. When the voters in each state cast votes for the Presidential candidate of their choice they are voting to select their state’s Electors. The potential Electors’ names may or may not appear on the ballot below the name of the Presidential candidates, depending on election procedures and ballot formats in each state.

The winning Presidential candidate’s slate of potential Electors are appointed as the state’s Electors—except in Nebraska and Maine, which have proportional distribution of the Electors. In Nebraska and Maine, the state winner receives two Electors and the winner of each congressional district (who may be the same as the overall winner or a different candidate) receives one Elector. This system permits the Electors from Nebraska and Maine to be awarded to more than one candidate.

Are there restrictions on who the Electors can vote for?
There is no Constitutional provision or Federal law that requires Electors to vote according to the results of the popular vote in their states. Some states, however, require Electors to cast their votes according to the popular vote. These pledges fall into two categories—Electors bound by state law and those bound by pledges to political parties.

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the Constitution does not require that Electors be completely free to act as they choose and therefore, political parties may extract pledges from electors to vote for the parties’ nominees. Some state laws provide that so-called “faithless Electors” may be subject to fines or may be disqualified for casting an invalid vote and be replaced by a substitute elector. The Supreme Court has not specifically ruled on the question of whether pledges and penalties for failure to vote as pledged may be enforced under the Constitution. No Elector has ever been prosecuted for failing to vote as pledged.

Today, it is rare for Electors to disregard the popular vote by casting their electoral vote for someone other than their party’s candidate. Electors generally hold a leadership position in their party or were chosen to recognize years of loyal service to the party. Throughout our history as a nation, more than 99 percent of Electors have voted as pledged.

The National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) has compiled a brief summary of state laws about the various procedures, which vary from state to state, for selecting slates of potential electors and for conducting the meeting of the electors. The document, Summary: State Laws Regarding Presidential Electors, can be downloaded from the resources/elections menu on the NASS website.

https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/electors.html


21 posted on 08/21/2019 9:17:58 PM PDT by mabarker1 ((Congress- the opposite of PROGRESS!!!) Z)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conan the Librarian
wanted to keep George Washington the only President to get 100%..

It was James Monroe that almost tied Washington.

22 posted on 08/21/2019 9:18:22 PM PDT by Nateman (If the left is not screaming, you are doing it wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy
It would seem to nullify the recent trend of leftist states wanting to cast all of their EV’s to the candidate (Dem, of course) getting a national majority of the popular votes.

That was my take on it too.

23 posted on 08/21/2019 9:22:24 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan (My tagline is in the shop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I don’t think Trump will let this pass.


24 posted on 08/21/2019 9:36:09 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
"“This court decision takes power from Colorado voters and sets a dangerous precedent," said Jena Griswold, Colorado's secretary of state. "Our nation stands on the principle of one person, one vote. We are reviewing this decision with our attorneys, and will vigorously protect Colorado voters.”

The federal court ruling conflicts with a decision from Washington state's Supreme Court in May, which said electors must follow the results of the popular vote. "The power of electors to vote comes from the state, and the elector has no personal right to that role,” the court said.

Lawyers from the nonprofit Equal Citizens, which represented the Washington state electors and Baca in Colorado, said they will appeal the Washington ruling to the Supreme Court."

Washington and Colorado both are in the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. By who is really reacting, I'm thinking this impacts that interstate compact rather than how the electoral college has functioned traditionally.

25 posted on 08/21/2019 9:40:26 PM PDT by Tench_Coxe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: princess leah

Hope it gets to the Supremes before the election.


26 posted on 08/21/2019 10:02:38 PM PDT by Veto! (Veto! (Political Correctness Offends Me))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Choosing each state’s Electors is a two-part process. First, the political parties in each state choose slates of potential Electors sometime before the general election. Second, on Election Day, the voters in each state select their state’s Electors by casting their ballots for President.


So how many Trump supporters are/were going to vote for Clinton?

Yes, the Electors are free to vote for the Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates they wish...but the Electors are chosen based upon who they support.


27 posted on 08/21/2019 10:06:20 PM PDT by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Overturned in... 3... 2... 1...


28 posted on 08/21/2019 10:16:43 PM PDT by Bullish (My tagline ran off with another man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dave W

That’s a bad assumption. SCOTUS will rule that it is the state to decide, not the federal court system.


29 posted on 08/21/2019 10:17:35 PM PDT by Fhios (I dig myself a hole deeper and deeper into the pit of Nihilism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

Well, that’s among the most egregious betrayals, and worthy of sudden death in my opinion.


30 posted on 08/21/2019 10:19:36 PM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conan the Librarian

You are thinking of 1820. If wasn’t clay, but some Monroe elector in NH THAT voted FOR JQ Adams instead of Monroe


31 posted on 08/21/2019 10:22:53 PM PDT by BigEdLB (BigEdLB, Russian BOT, At your service)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Meatspace

Each party has its own set of electors. When you vote for Trump, you are actually voting for his slate of electors who are chosen by the Rep Party. Some states require the electors to vote based on the state popular vote. Other states don’t have such requirements. This federal decision overrides the State’s ability to require how an elector votes.


32 posted on 08/21/2019 10:23:58 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
The writers of the Constitution wanted a way to override the people if they made a stupid choice.

Do you always make up such silly lies? Please do point to just one writing by any Founder where they discuss the notion of "the people making a stupid choice" had to have some resolution.

33 posted on 08/21/2019 10:29:11 PM PDT by Teacher317 (We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: kabar
You are correct.

It's not that the electors are required to vote for the popular vote winner, it's that they're already predisposed to do so because they are part of a partisan slate that was vetted by the party and the candidate's campaign team.

The voters are voting for competing partisan slates of electors.

-PJ

34 posted on 08/21/2019 10:32:27 PM PDT by Political Junkie Too (The 1st Amendment gives the People the right to a free press, not CNN the right to the 1st question.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Bookmark


35 posted on 08/21/2019 10:57:59 PM PDT by BunnySlippers (I Love Bull Markets!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kaehurowing

So in newspeak then, a faithless elector is now the elector that votes against the compact to represent the voters of his/her state that carried the majority in the state that was not in line with the national popular vote?


36 posted on 08/21/2019 11:00:35 PM PDT by RainMan (rainman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
"The people select electors who promise to vote for a certain candidate."

No, the people select electors who are expected to exercise their best judgment as to who should govern the country.

37 posted on 08/22/2019 1:13:21 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel and NRA Life Member)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Louis Foxwell

It is rare for an elector to be faithless, but it has happened.


38 posted on 08/22/2019 1:30:57 AM PDT by erkelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Big deal! We’ve been sending people to Versailles on the Potomac for years who vote and legislate however they want. Ballot box is gone.


39 posted on 08/22/2019 2:22:02 AM PDT by NTHockey (Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners. And to the NSA trolls, FU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I thought that was the way it always has been.


40 posted on 08/22/2019 2:58:23 AM PDT by MagnoliaB ( You can't always get what you want but if you try sometime you will find you get what you need.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson